Why the revolution USA and Mexico still exist?They should be replaced

This make no sense,although they have some diffrences with the main USA and Mexico,but we already have them.That is a great waste if they cannot replaced by other revolution civs.

My advice is:
revo USA(British)-------Australia
revo USA(French)--------Vietnam
revo USA(Dutch)-------Belgium
revo USA(Sweden)-------Livonia
revo USA(Italian)-------Greece
revo Mexico-------paraguay or Mapuche,I can’t decide it

1 Like

I have a suggestion thread here for an Australian revolution to replace the US →

There were early French and Dutch explorers in Australia at the same time as the British, so I think it would be cool to have it as an option for all three civs (to replace the US). In fact you could even make an admittedly tenuous case that the Portuguese could also work with an Australian revolution :stuck_out_tongue:

I disagree. I mean they were since the original Warchiefs expansion and were the most obvious revolutions for their respective ‘mother’ civs.

It’s not a great waste - their assets are already there and it would be weird that the one actual revolution that was via the British in reality (during the timeline) is ‘locked out’ for them.

(I still wouldn’t mind Australia as an offshoot - though Revolution is a bit strong a word :grin:)

That is really a great idea,my friend.Australia is a Multi-ethnic country,not only have the nationalities you have mantioned,but also have many other nationalities,such as Greek,Lebanese even our Chinese
And my friend you supposted to be Australian,I had a foreign teacher in middle school,he is Australian,a very good man.In my eyes Australian is kind,honest,lively and not to stick at trifles,just like the people in my homecity,Tianjin.

1 Like

I keep my opinion,because replace them will let us get new revolution civs such as Belgium or Greece,and it is also well documented.

That’s fine and in fact Belgium or Greece work really well for their mother countries they splinter off, however the notion of getting rid of the most famous (in the Anglo-sphere) revolutionary nation from the British would not sit well with many. The US as a playable civ is more odd when you factor in the timelines and how all their roster is far too modern compared to other Age II armies, but it is what it is.

As we have Canada for the British, I think Australia would fit in well. Both didn’t revolt, but rather they did become Self-Governing. I wish they’d change the Revolt button to an Independence button - something broader to encapsulate the fact that new nations that splintered off from their mother nations weren’t always from violence (this term also covers your stand Revolutions as well of course).


I think the Australian players agree with my idea because everyone want to see his/her homecountry in this game.And for USA,it has already exist,don’t need to be two USA in this game and the campaign has mentioned this period,just like Mexico for Spain.So in my eyes they have already been a civ so that they don’t need to revo to anyone.It has already an accomplished fact.


Because they come from TWC and symbolize the American Revolution/War of Independence (1775-1783) and the Mexican Revolution/War of Independence (1810-1821)…the United States civ symbolize all of American history from Washington to Lincoln (1789- 1865) while the Mexican civ symbolizes all Mexican history from Miguel Hidalgo to Porfirio Diaz (1810-1876/1911)…

1 Like

My friend,nice to see you again.I know that history about that,but I simply want to see more revolution civs,replace those two revo civs may be a good choice.

Yes, or last add more revs and that’s it…


France colonized Vietnam super, super late. It sticks out like a sore thumb. They should just get Belgium imo.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be Vietnam, it can also be Algeria… you already have the capture of Algiers as a historical battle and the birth of the Algerian Regency (1516-1830), you can have an Algerian revolution (1830-1848) with the French…

French Algeria (French: Alger to 1839, then Algérie afterwards;[1] unofficially Algérie française,[2][3] Arabic: الجزائر المستعمرة), also known as Colonial Algeria, was the period of Algerian history when the region was a colony and later a part of France. French rule in the region began after the French successful invasion of Algeria and lasted until the end of the Algerian War leading to its independence in 1962. After being a French colony from 1830 to 1848, Algeria was a part of France from 4 November 1848 when the Constitution of French Second Republic took effect until its independence on 5 July 1962.

Or just more choice in addition to those that already exist :slight_smile:

Another left-field ‘Revolution’ could be for the British to splinter off to the East India Company. It was its own company venture with its own military and economy, working under its own steam for 422 years until ceded to the British government. Basically British units and infrastructure with a sprinking of Indian units and buildings. Again, you just have to look at British revolutions as a whole - historically in the time-frame the US are the only nation to truely revolt and become independent (Haiti never revolted from the British and Canada/South Africa became independent properly in the 20th century), so there’s a little room for more novel offshoots.

1 Like

i dont know how good of an idea it is to make that many individual revolutions, it would take up a lot of dev hours to make each of these unique individual revolutions.

TBH, aside from a little polish (and balance) I think the current ones are fine and there’s plenty of them. If no more were added, in favour of working on some actual (new!) civs (such as Asian/African/NA), I’d be far happier!

Such as Paraguay or chechnya,etc.

It would be nice if each European civ could have at least 1 individual revolution to be their unique option. The French, Spanish and Ottomans already fulfilled this requirement.

Also, since I think European revolutions are essentially a special kind of politician (which would also explain those options in the past being revolutionary leaders), it would be nicer to have the same number of options for each civ. Or, try not to make the number of options vary too much between civs.

Si agregan argentina y Brasil como civilizaciones tendremos a Uruguay como revolución😃

It is a great idea,many revs can be add in the game,such as Australia to British or Chechnya and ukraine to Russia.

Of course… although Chechnya seems to me to be a very modern rev…